New Ulm weekly review., 1887-11-09
A Country i.ayyyer.
ON the Newark Journal.

s[El 81
From the Newark journal.
Some twenty y-five or thirty year
ago there lived in Iowa a young mar
by the name OF Samuel Randolph, a.
that time engaged in teaching a coun
try school, and during leisure hours
reading Blackstone in orderto qualif.
himself for admission to the bar
Near the schoolhouse lived two farm
ers, who will be designated as "A and
B. a owned a large number of hogs.
which he allowed to run at large te
feed on the mast. B owned q corn
field, fenced with a badly dilapidate6
brush fence. He also owned 8 saw
age dog. When the corn began tc
ripen, AS hogs madeGfrequent raids
into the field and helped themselve
to the corn. B, being greatly annoye,
by them. finally set his dog on tn.
hogs and worried them considerably
When A discovered his lascer
ated hogs he was full of wrath
The next day A started, with al
ak on his shoulder, to go to his tim
Der to chop wood. which led him b,
BIS house, and seeing B's wife insld,
OF BIS lot, about thirty or forty fee
from the fence, milking q COW, hi
stopped at the gate and inquired TO
3. Being informed tnat B was not a
nome, he threatened to smash B tt
the earth if he ever dogged his hogs
again, and to demonstrate how ht
would do it he brought his ak dow
on the fence with fe rful blow. III
then left. When B returned his wifi
infor ned him OF AS threat, whicl
made him madder than a March hare
and off he goes to the schoolhouse te
consult Sam Randolph whether h,
would sue A "with the law Ran
dolph, after consulting his Blackston.
and the statutes, informed him tina,
the act constituted the offense of ''as
sault with intent TO lnhict great bodi
ly injury" and advised B to com
mence a criminal prosecution agains,
A.
Randolph drew up an information
and Is took it to the nearest justice
and had a warrant issued for AS ar
rest. A being duly arrested, anc
q day set for the trial, Randolph
appeared for the prosecution anc
a man named Jones as attorney
for the defendant. The witnesses being
sworn, the facts as above stated were
duly proven. Randolph then proceed.
ed with a lengthy argument, not tc
convince the court of the defendants
guilt, but to convince the court and
bystanders that he had read Black
stone, and concluded his argument
with the following peroration: May
1t please your honor. the summum
bonum of the whole business is that
the desendant is guilty.
Then Jones, for the defense, address
ed the court as follows: 'Your honor,
it may be that under that old law of
samnum bonum-which was that il
any man was charged with a crime, he
was guilty, whether he had ever done,
anything wrong or not-that my cli-e
ent is guilty; but that law was an un--
just law enacted by despots and ty-
rantsto Cypress theweak and the poor.
That was the law of this country down
to the time of the revolutionary war
when our forefsthers rcbelled against
it, and after seven long years of
bloody war, finally repealed it with
their swords and enacted in it's stead
the great law Of e Pluribus Unum,
which is that man is never guilty Of
any crime until he does something
wrong. Now, since prosecutor was
not within d mile of the fence when
the blow was struck, he could not
have been injured; and as the blow
did the fence no harm, my client did
no wrong Therefore, under the great
law of E Pluribus Unum, which is now
the law Of this country. he is not
guilty. and should be discharged
The justice then summed up the case
as follows: "Well, it appears by the
argument that under the old law OF
summon bonus the defendant guilty.;
but my father was revolutionary
soldier, and I've heard him tell all
about the revolutionary war. and SO
I know that the old law of summun
bonus has been abolished, and the
great law of E Pluribus Unum now
waves all over this country. So let's ,
the defendant 60"
. II. a. 1- K